Acceptance Conditions in Automated Negotiation

In every negotiation with a deadline, one of the negotiating parties has to accept an offer to avoid a break off. A break off is usually an undesirable outcome for both parties, therefore it is important that a negotiator employs a proficient mechanism to decide under which conditions to accept. When designing such conditions one is faced with the acceptance dilemma: accepting the current offer may be suboptimal, as better offers may still be presented. On the other hand, accepting too late may prevent an agreement from being reached, resulting in a break off with no gain for either party. Motivated by the challenges of bilateral negotiations between automated agents and by the results and insights of the automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC), we classify and compare state-of-the-art generic acceptance conditions. We focus on decoupled acceptance conditions, i.e. conditions that do not depend on the bidding strategy that is used. We performed extensive experiments to compare the performance of acceptance conditions in combination with a broad range of bidding strategies and negotiation domains. Furthermore we propose new acceptance conditions and we demonstrate that they outperform the other conditions that we study. In particular, it is shown that they outperform the standard acceptance condition of comparing the current offer with the offer the agent is ready to send out. We also provide insight in to why some conditions work better than others and investigate correlations between the properties of the negotiation environment and the efficacy of acceptance conditions.

[1]  S. Hart,et al.  Handbook of game theory with economic applications: volume 3 , 1993 .

[2]  Niels van Galen Last Agent Smith: Opponent Model Estimation in Bilateral Multi-issue Negotiation , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[3]  Liu Xin A Service-oriented Negotiation Model Between Autonomous Agents , 2003 .

[4]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  A Service-Oriented Negotiation Model between Autonomous Agents , 1997, MAAMAW.

[5]  Gregory E. Kersten,et al.  Central European Journal of Operational Research , 2003 Mining Inspire Data for the Determinants of Successful Internet Negotiations , 2003 .

[6]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents , 1998, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[7]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Optimal Negotiation Strategies for Agents with Incomplete Information , 2001, ATAL.

[8]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Towards a Quality Assessment Method for Learning Preference Profiles in Negotiation , 2008, AMEC/TADA.

[9]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Multi-issue negotiation under time constraints , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[10]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Strategic Negotiation in Multiagent Environments , 2001, Intelligent robots and autonomous agents.

[11]  Carles Sierra,et al.  A Negotiation Meta Strategy Combining Trade-off and Concession Moves , 2006, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[12]  G. E. Kersten,et al.  Rational Agents, Contract Curves, and Inefficient Compromises Report , 1997 .

[13]  Liviu Dan Serban,et al.  AgentFSEGA: Time Constrained Reasoning Model for Bilateral Multi-Issue Negotiations , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[14]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Supporting the Design of General Automated Negotiators , 2010 .

[15]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Using similarity criteria to make negotiation trade-offs , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[16]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  Innovations in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations , 2011 .

[17]  H. Raiffa The Art & Science of Negotiation , 1983 .

[18]  Catholijn M. Jonker,et al.  An agent architecture for multi-attribute negotiation using incomplete preference information , 2007, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[19]  S. Hart,et al.  Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications , 1992 .

[20]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  AgentK: Compromising Strategy based on Estimated Maximum Utility for Automated Negotiating Agents , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[21]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations , 2011, Studies in Computational Intelligence.

[22]  Jacques L. Koko,et al.  The Art and Science of Negotiation , 2009 .

[23]  A. Rubinstein,et al.  Bargaining and Markets , 1991 .

[24]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[25]  A. Rubinstein Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model , 1982 .

[26]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  The First Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2010) , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[27]  Shou-De Lin,et al.  Designing the Market Game for a Trading Agent Competition , 2001, IEEE Internet Comput..

[28]  Hiromitsu Hattori,et al.  Multi-issue Negotiation Protocol for Agents: Exploring Nonlinear Utility Spaces , 2007, IJCAI.

[29]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  IAMhaggler: A Negotiation Agent for Complex Environments , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[30]  Bo An,et al.  Yushu: A Heuristic-Based Agent for Automated Negotiating Competition , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[31]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  AgentK2: Compromising Strategy Based on Estimated Maximum Utility for Automated Negotiating Agents , 2013, Complex Automated Negotiations.

[32]  Katsuhide Fujita,et al.  Compromising Strategy Based on Estimated Maximum Utility for Automated Negotiation Agents Competition (ANAC-10) , 2011, IEA/AIE.

[33]  Karl Shell,et al.  Economic Theory, Econometrics, and Mathematical Economics , 1993 .

[34]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent , 2008, Artif. Intell..

[35]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  GENIUS: AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENT FOR SUPPORTING THE DESIGN OF GENERIC AUTOMATED NEGOTIATORS , 2012, Comput. Intell..

[36]  Hiromitsu Hattori,et al.  An Auction-Based Negotiation Protocol for Agents with Nonlinear Utility Functions , 2006 .

[37]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Investigating the benefits of automated negotiations in enhancing people's negotiation skills , 2009, AAMAS.

[38]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Opponent modelling in automated multi-issue negotiation using Bayesian learning , 2008, AAMAS.